PurpleSkyz

shareCommentsJesse Ventura’s new book, They Killed Our President: 63 Facts That Prove a Conspiracy to Kill JFK, presents a far-reaching and startlingly case against the official story of President Kennedy’s assassination.In this second in a series of excerpts from the book, Ventura presents information that he claims shows Oswald could not have realistically fired the shots — any shots — at John F. Kennedy.

A couple minutes after President Kennedy had been shot, a clerical supervisor was returning to her office on the second floor of the lunch room in the Texas School Book Depository building. Her statement said that on the way to her office, she saw an employee who she knew, Lee Harvey Oswald; that he had a Coca-Cola bottle in his hand and seemed very calm.Her exact words were, “I had no thoughts or anything of him having any connection with it all because he was very calm.”She had no reason to lie. She was just saying what she saw. That was all she could recall about him at that time, as there was a lot going on. But those were the two things about seeing Oswald on the second floor that afternoon that she clearly remembered. That he was very calm and had a Coca-Cola bottle in his hand. Remember that. If you’ve studied this like I have, you’re now a “juror for history”; and those are two things that you’ll need to remember later.Motive, means, and opportunity. Those are the things you have to prove to convict a defendant in a murder trial. People often get confused on the opportunity aspect. What that means is that it has to have been possible for the defendant to have committed the crime. If they had a solid alibi, for example, that they were in a different location at that exact time then – since they could not have been in two places at once – their attorneys can prove that they lacked opportunity. It is logistically impossible that Oswald was the one who fired from the sixth floor of that building and even a half-decent defense attorney could have proven that to a jury’s satisfaction.In addition to the fact that “no one could put him in that window” – i.e. at the scene of the crime, which comes direct from the Dallas Police Chief, no less – it has been conclusively established that Oswald was already elsewhere and that he, therefore, did not possess opportunity. Let me explain.Solid eyewitness testimony confirms that Oswald was in the lunchroom on the second floor fifteen minutes before the shooting of the President. As veteran investigative researcher Anthony Summers noted:

The bald fact is that Oswald cannot be placed on the sixth floor either at the time of the shooting or during the half hour before it. The last time he was reliably seen before the assassination was by Mrs. Arnold – in the second floor lunchroom. The next time Oswald was firmly identified was immediately after the assassination – again in the second floor lunchroom.

Those are strong indications that Oswald was exactly where he told the police he was – eating lunch in the first floor domino room and then going up to the second floor lunchroom and buying a Coca-Cola from the vending machine. Oswald correctly verified the individuals as well as the timing – so he was either right where he said he was, or possessed psychic powers.It gets even better. One witness – a man named Howard Brennan – stated that, from outside Oswald’s building, he saw two men in the sixth floor window and one of them had a rifle. As any jury would not – and any defense attorney would absolutely love – even though Mr. Brennan had seen Oswald’s picture on television before going to the police lineups, he failed to make a positive identification of Oswald as one of the men whom he saw in the sixth floor window.But an employee named Bonnie Ray Williams was eating lunch on the sixth floor until at least 12:15p.m. and testified that Oswald was not there. Williams was right, because as witness Carolyn Arnold substantiated, at 12:15, Oswald was still in the lunchroom. She’s certain she saw him there “about 12:15. It may have been slightly later.”The time that Arnold Rowland saw the rifle in the window was pinpointed by events correlating to the police log: it was between 12:15 and 12:16. So the timing actually proves that whoever Rowland saw in that window, it was not Lee Harvey Oswald. Sightings of Oswald downstairs by four eyewitnesses – both before and after Rowland saw the man on the sixth floor with a rifle – make it impossible that Oswald was the man he saw.But that didn’t stop the government. They made the case that Oswald finished his lunch, raced upstairs to the “sniper’s nest” that was set up behind some boxes at the sixth floor window, fired three shots at the President, killing him and wounding the Governor of Texas, then – since the elevator was not used – raced down the stairs, back to the second floor lunchroom, where he was seen by Dallas Police Officer Marion Baker and building supervisor Roy Truly. Besides, wouldn’t Oswald have been more than a little out of breath, instead of the calmly-collected guy that other witnesses saw?So, the problem quickly became one of timing.Keep in mind that the shooter had to also take the time to hide that rifle:

The rifle was found tightly wedged within a stack of books, a task that would seem to require more than a few seconds. It was so deeply hidden in the boxes that one of the Dallas sheriffs claimed that searchers could have walked right by it and not noticed it.

So the would-be investigators from the Warren Commission quickly sent Dallas police officers scurrying up and down the stairs of the Book Depository and timed them with a stopwatch. But the problem was that there wasn’t really enough time after the assassination for Oswald to have stashed the rifle, run down the stairs from the sixth to the second floor, buy a Coca-Cola at the vending machine, and actually be there at the time the Dallas cop saw him there.So what did they do? They tried to correct this impossibility by shaving off the time that it took to buy the Coca-Cola from the vending machine! Then the timing was better. While acknowledging that it was close, they said that they had proved that it was physically possible…Continued on Page 2

shareCommentsIndependent researchers tried it and reached quite different conclusions:

Alternative, independent calculations say that, if Oswald had really been a gunman, he could not have reached the lunchroom in time for the meeting with the policeman.

Numerous studies have substantiated that, by any realistic standard, Oswald could not have done it and even if he had, certainly would not have been so calm, cool, and collected when seen right after the assassination. It’s quite logical to assume that any person would exhibit some sense of anxiousness after just having killed the President of the United States and wounding the Governor. Especially after racing down the stairs afterwards, sweating would be expected, rapid breathing would be expected, and excitement would be expected. But none of the aforementioned were present in the calm and composed Lee Harvey Oswald…Add to that the highly significant point that President Kennedy’s motorcade was late. Had it been on time – the published time that any assassin would have to plan for – then the motorcade actually would have passed Oswald’s building at 12:25p.m., raising a huge timing problem on the front side of the issue as well, because credible witness testimony placed Oswald in the lunch room at 12:15. So he’s calmly eating lunch at 12:15 on the second floor, raising the following huge red flag:

A killer who had planned the assassination would hardly have been sitting around downstairs after 12:15p.m., as the evidence about Oswald suggests, if he expected to open fire as early as 12:25.

It got even worse for the government. To prove that it was even possible time-wise for Oswald to have made it downstairs in two minutes after doing the shooting, they had to eliminate the purchase of Coca-Cola from the vending machine. In fact, if you look at the official statement of Dallas Police Officer Marion Baker, the words “drinking a coke” are crossed out with his initials above. He and Roy Truly, the building supervisor, also specifically noted in their Warren Commission testimony that Oswald did not have a Coca-Cola!Well, nice try, fellahs! Now remember back if you will, fellow juror, to the two points I made at the beginning of this entry.A witness with no reason to lie.Two minutes after the assassination.Two things she remembered about Oswald.He was very calm; and he had a Coca-Cola in his hand.If the case went to trial and you were Oswald’s attorney, you’d have a pretty tough time keeping a grin off your face at that exact point of evidence. Please excuse my language in advance, but don’t you love it when these bastards get caught by their own lies?And as Anthony Summers and others have pointed out, if there wasn’t a Coca-Cola in his hands, then why on earth was everyone referring to it?

Baker himself initially wrote in his statement that he “saw a man standing in the lunchroom drinking a Coke.” One of the details announced by Police Chief Curry was that Oswald was seen by Baker and the building superintendent Roy Truly, carrying a Coke. If that were not so, it is hard to see how such a precise detail arose in the first place. Yet Baker and Truly ended up saying Oswald had nothing in his hand when they met him.

So the infamous Coca-Cola in Lee Harvey Oswald’s hand officially disappeared. It had to disappear, because if Oswald had taken all that time after the assassination – coming down all those stairs from the sixth floor to the second, going to the vending machine and buying a Coke – then he could not have been standing there calmly in the lunchroom as Office Baker officially discovered him.

The question is important to the issue of whether Oswald could have got down from the sixth floor to encounter Baker and Truly when he did. Without obtaining a Coke, it would have been a close shave. If Oswald had purchased and started drinking a Coke by the time of the encounter with the policeman, the known time frame is stretched to the bursting point – some would say beyond.

Oswald himself, incidentally, told the Chief of Homicide he was “drinking a Coca-Cola when the officer came in.” In this author’s opinion, the balance of the evidence suggests he was. The matter can be put even more bluntly than the manner expressed above by Mr. Summers with his British politeness:

(Officer) Baker was asked by the FBI to give an affidavit regarding his encounter with Oswald in the lunchroom, Commission Exhibit 3076, Baker makes no mention of seeing someone moving through the glass in the doorway and states that he “saw a man standing in the lunchroom drinking a coke.”The phrase “drinking a coke” is crossed out and initialed by Baker, but that deleted phrase, by its spontaneous mention, corroborates Oswald’s story that he had already purchased a Coke when stopped by Baker and makes a liar out of both Baker and Roy Truly.

So the facts are pretty clear and would play that way to a jury. Oswald bought a Coca-Cola, just like he said he did, and just like witnesses who had no reason to lie swore that they saw him standing there after the assassination with a bottle of Coke in his hand. That, in itself, proves he could not have had time to fire three shots from the “sniper’s nest” on the sixth floor, stash the rifle, come down to the second floor via the long stairway (which was also slow to traverse because the configuration had a gap between floors, meaning that you had to come down one flight of stairs and then had to walk over to the area where the stairs continued down again), go to the vending machine, purchase a drink, and then be in the lunchroom two minutes after the assassination of the President.The fact that he was already in that lunchroom, and was even calm and unshaken – as several eyewitnesses confirmed – speaks loudly that he was not the shooter on the sixth floor a mere two minutes prior to that time.

READ PART ONE OF THIS EXCERPTRead more passages from Jesse’s book.Excerpted with permission of Skyhorse Publishing, Inc., New York, NY.